On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 01:02:11PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Fri, 17.02.12 10:46, Nathaniel McCallum (nathan...@natemccallum.com) wrote: > > > I'm a fan of systemd [1]. And although I didn't like the fact that unit > > files were stored in /lib, I understood the rationale since there was no > > /share. However, I've just recently discovered [2] that after UsrMove unit > > files will be stored in /usr/lib. Can we not do better than this? And I'd > > really rather not work around the problem [3]. > > > > Seriously, please don't do this. > > The unit files are in /lib for a couple of reasons. Firstly, before the > /usr merge there was no /share, so we had to place them in > /lib. Secondly I think that /lib is actually the better fit for them, > simply because I consider them closely related to the code they wrap, > and code belongs in lib, libexec or bin. How does that matter? Well, the > unit files are very often dependendent on/closely related to the > architecture, and make little sense to share them between archs. This > applies to a couple of units we ship with systemd itself (for example > the hugepages mount unit), but even more often to unit we don't ship > ourselves (think mcelog). And distributing these unit files among a > number of dirs would seriously suck. > This sounds like the unit files belong in %{_libdir} now? However, that would mean that they can't go into noarch packages. So we probably need to know a little more about just how architecture dependent these unit files can be.
-Toshio
pgpaq3J20e4fy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel